If someone makes a pledge to your political campaign, even if they haven't given you the money yet, you need to report it.

That's the law in Washington State.

So last month, when Pastor Joe Fuiten went on Q13 television to announce, "Yesterday, there was a commitment of $1 million made to this campaign," political observers waited—and waited—for the group trying to overturn the recently passed same-sex-marriage law to name its anonymous major donor.

Then the reporting deadline came on March 13. While Preserve Marriage Washington did report $17,145 by the deadline—mostly in the form of in-kind donations—there was no mention of the $1 million pledge.

So who's this alleged big pledger?

All signs would suggest it's the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

In February, NOM announced it would assist the campaign to place the potentially gay-marriage-repealing Referendum 74 on the fall ballot, even adding explicitly this month on its blog that it "will actively join with Preserve Marriage Washington to circulate petitions on R-74." It would be typical of NOM to spend big money in Washington. NOM contributed $1.4 million to repeal same-sex marriage in Maine in 2009 and $1.8 million in California in 2008.

But it would also be typical of NOM to obfuscate its finances. In several states, NOM has tried to block the release of information about its donors. It hasn't always been successful, losing, for example, in federal court last October when a judge ruled that it must identify the donors who pledged to repeal a marriage-equality law in California.

But here, advocates of transparency could get steamrollered.

Asked if she was familiar with NOM's track record in other states, Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) spokeswoman Lori Anderson said she was not and that she did not necessarily perceive Fuiten's on-camera, million-dollar-pledge claim to be a report-requiring pledge. After I e-mailed her repeatedly, however, Anderson did ask the local campaign about it. "When I contacted the treasurer for that campaign, Joseph Backholm, he told us, 'We have not found anyone to give us a million dollars,'" she told me.

It's possible that Fuiten, who has been involved with the R-74 effort, was simply confused when he was on TV. When asked about the pledge, Fuiten said, "Just to clarify that comment, I did believe, and still do, that a substantial amount of money even beyond a million dollars will be raised for this effort. I am not saying that any individual or organization has promised that they themselves will give $1 million to the effort out of their own funds."

So which is it? Was there "a commitment of $1 million made to this campaign"—which is pretty specific, and exactly what Fuiten said on TV—or not?

"We know our opponents have a long track record of both hiding donors and disobeying public disclosure laws," Zach Silk, consultant to the campaign trying to uphold the state's marriage equality law, says about NOM. "But it very well might be that our opponents are as disorganized as they claim and they are unable to track a million dollars."

NOM did not reply to a request for comment.